Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received a letter from the honourable Leader of the Opposition proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The hurt and division caused by the Government’s unfair budget and broken promises.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Despite the shenanigans by the government, who will do anything not to debate the budget, this dreadful budget. It has been two weeks since it was handed down, and the people of Australia have made their verdict clear on this most unfair budget.

Australians from all walks of life, from all parts of Australia and from all sorts of political affiliations have said that this budget is the wrong budget for Australia; it is the wrong budget for our economy; it is the wrong budget for our communities.

Australians and Labor acknowledge that Mr Abbott was given a great chance at the last election, but since then he has got it all wrong. The country that Tony Abbott wants to build is not the country that Australians want to see. The Prime Minister is taking Australians down the wrong path. We do not want the Australia that Tony Abbott wants or the future that Tony Abbott wants for our families. Australians are deeply concerned that the Abbott government is creating a permanent underclass. There is no point to being a mean-hearted government.

This great country of ours has taken decades to create and yet this Abbott government budget will tear it down much more quickly. Australians are generous enough. Australians know that this is indeed a lucky country. They know that it is mean and unreasonable to make Australians who earn less than $50,000 a year carry the burden of this budget. Supporters of Labor and supporters of the coalition all understand that no support for young people under the age of 30 who are unemployed will indeed create a society where more of our young people sleep rough.

This budget should put the government on notice. The reaction of the people is: 'Don't push the Australian people too hard. Don't take Australia where we do not want to go.' Australians do not want a beggar society. We do not want our young people sleeping on crates. Look at the Liberals walk out. The truth is too hard for them to hear. We do not want Australians barred from seeing their doctor or seeking lifesaving preventative care.

We recognise that this budget is a fork in the road and there are choices for this parliament to make. Labor will not allow this budget to do to Australia what Margaret Thatcher did to the United Kingdom in the early 1980s. It is a budget drawn up with no understanding of how this country works. It is a budget that says you can have either a tough society or a fair society but you cannot have both.

Labor understand that we can have a sustainable budget. We understand that tough decisions need to be made, that our terms of trade have decreased and that nominal GDP is falling, but we also understand that, in order to make the budget sustainable, we do not have to challenge the basic pillars of Australian life. We do not need to undermine universal health care. We do not need to undermine the Disability Insurance Scheme and the lives lived by people with disabilities and their carers. We can sustain a decent pension and education for all. We can sustain a fair national minimum wage and full employment, along with compulsory superannuation.

The Liberal Party have only one prescription for Australia—it is that of extreme ideology, the vested interests of the Commission of Audit, written by their friends in parts of big business. The Liberal budget of the last fortnight has a view that says that society should leave people to fend for themselves. This budget, however, makes little difference to some of the very privileged representatives who sit opposite us. The talk by Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey that we are all sharing the pain equally, that there is equality of sacrifice, is a fairytale. At the same time that pensioners are asked to lose payments, supplements and concessions we have this government engaging in self-promotional propaganda and advertising. At the same time that the sick and vulnerable will be taxed to go to the doctor we will have millionaires receive $50,000 extra for having a baby. Hardworking Australians are being told that they can work till they are 70, but Abbott cabinet ministers will be able to retire at 60 with a defined benefit pension. Our universities are being deregulated, with access to higher education consciously designed top-down to discourage children from less advantaged backgrounds and their parents from ever having the hope of going to university. We have even got a petrol tax that is so manufactured that every Australian is going to pay it.

Today we discovered in estimates that Tony Abbott's great austere approach of staying at the police academy is in fact costing $1.7 billion. While the battler Mr Abbott sits with multimillion dollar support in what he is doing he would lecture Australians to do much worse. I understand that Tony Abbott is a fan of Downton Abbeyand I understand that he has butlers himself. The resources going to the Prime Minister are not appropriate for a man who would lecture and moralise the rest of Australia.

We believe in a mature, sophisticated, generous society and community. This budget does divide the country. We in Labor put our faith in three elements for Australian progress: we believe that this nation can have in the future a generous and decent safety net; we believe in encouraging the dreams of Australians to be able to do better for themselves and their families; and we have a practical sense of how this economy needs to adapt in the future. This budget makes the difference in Labor values and Liberal values crystal clear. I know the government have been complaining, 'What is the alternative?' Why don't you test your budget at an election and let Australians decide who has the better alternative? There is no chance of this cowardly mob in the government ever submitting this budget to an election before they inflict their pain on Australians.

The government and some of their friends in the conservative columns in some newspapers have been saying that Labor is being negative and that somehow we are not doing what the government wants to do. Let me tell you what negative is. Negative is a new GP tax. Positive is supporting Medicare. I will tell you what negative is. It is making sure that $30 billion comes out of schools in Australia. Positive is what Labor would do and fund our schools according to need so that every child can get a great education. Negative is doubling the cost of degrees, it is increasing the rate of interest of repayments and it is discouraging the dreams of normal people to send their kids to university. Positive is making sure that universities remain in the reach of ordinary Australians and are not just the preserve of the very privileged. Negative is sentencing Australians under 30 who are unemployed to six months without any form of income. That is cost shifting the burden of Australian society and finding employment from government to the shoulders and the backs of the unemployed and their families. Positive is helping Australians find work. Negative is pushing pensioners by decreasing the rate of their indexation. How dare the Treasurer of Australia say that there is no cut to pensions in this country. The facts speak for themselves: $400 million plus is being treated as a cut to the cost of pensions in 2017 in the forward estimates of this government's budget.

We believe in a better Australia than the government do. We understand that the government do not understand the health system of Australia. We understand that this government do not get education. We understand that this government do not get cost-of-living pressures. We get that this government do not understand the regions. And when will the National Party stand up for the regions of Australia that they claim to love? It is all right for them to say things in their local newspapers, it is all right for them to say things in the privacy of their own caucus room, but when will they stand up for country Australia? But the good news for regional Australia is Labor will stand up for country Australia.

Today there have been two very different party meetings held in this building. On this side of the House we met to stand up for Medicare. We met to stand up for kids at school. We met to stand up for pensioners. We met to stand up for ordinary Australians with cost-of-living pressures. But then there was that other meeting, where you had people either sycophantly saying, 'Thank you, Prime Minister, for the worst budget I've ever seen'—I do not often agree with Senator Cory Bernardi—in fact I never agree with him—but I do note that he wrote to supporters and said that this budget is one of the 'dumbest' in decades. Senator Cory Bernardi proving that even a stopped clock can be right once a day.

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Twice.

Bill Shorten (Maribyrnong, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Twice—well you have never been right twice on this budget, sunshine! And then we go back to what happened in their party room. Look at the member for Eden-Monaro: hundreds of jobs going out of Queanbeyan, nothing to be done for the pensioners. The good news is that the voters will have their desserts. This budget divides Australia and Labor will fight it all the way.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We see an example today of the Leader of the Opposition highlighting the extent to which Labor is prepared to go down a very lowbrow road indeed. We see the man who is meant to be the alternative Prime Minister—

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A statesman.

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

he is meant to be a statesman—outline Labor's approach and their vicious, personal attacks on the Prime Minister. There is one thing that is crystal clear about the modern Australian Labor Party and that is this: Labor would always rather attack the man than they would attack the policy. We have seen a complete policy vacuum from the Australian Labor Party for the past two weeks. For two weeks the government have been attempting to argue why Australia needs structural reform. For two weeks we have been open and upfront to the Australian people about why things need to change. For two weeks the coalition have been outlining why Labor's trajectory was unsustainable and ultimately would mean more pain and more hurt in the future unless small changes were made now. And you would think that the Labor Party, and in particular the man who is meant to be the alternative Prime Minister of the country, would show the slightest bit of statesmanship. You think he might address some of the policy issues that have been at the centre of the debate in this parliament over the past two weeks. But none of that, none of that at all from the Leader of the Opposition. What we had was nasty and tawdry and vicious attacks against the Prime Minister and other members of the coalition.

I say to the Labor Party: grow up; start to learn that the Australian people have rejected the negativity and the barefaced mistruths that we have heard and continue to hear from the Australian Labor Party. And if you would like examples, there is already a myriad of them that were just enunciated once again from the Australian Labor Party. We see the Australian Labor Party talk about how they want—and we just heard this from the Leader of the Opposition—a 'mature and sophisticated debate'. I cannot believe the hypocrisy. Well let us deal with some facts for a change, rather than the personal arguments that we have heard for 10 minutes from the Leader of the Opposition. Let us talk about what is going on in health. Let us talk about what is going on in education. And let us talk about what is going on with pensions. Because those are the three main elements where the Australian Labor Party likes to puff their chests out and say, 'Don't worry Australian people; we'll be the defenders of those three shibboleths when it comes to the Australian society'.

Unfortunately, the truth does not accord with the rhetoric from the Australian Labor Party. Labor's approach in relation to each of those three unfortunately leaves a lot to be desired. Indeed, in the Leader of the Opposition's budget-in-reply speech a little over a week ago he said:

Gone, $50 billion from hospital funding to states.

He has repeated it on numerous occasions since then, and Labor members up hill and down dale like to say that the coalition is cutting funding to health. But it is simply not true. As the Prime Minister outlined today, what we see is that annual federal assistance to the states for public hospitals will increase by nine per cent every year for the next three years and by six per cent in the fourth year: representing a total increase of funding to the states for public hospitals of 40 per cent. But you do not hear those facts from the opposition. They would rather terrify people, they would rather run around spreading mistruths, attempting to manipulate the Australian public into thinking that this was the worst budget ever handed down.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are telling us!

Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

But the facts are when the Australian public know the facts, and they are quickly catching on to the facts—I tell the member for Richmond they are seeing straight through the Labor Party's manipulation of the truth. They learn that funding for health is increasing by 40 per cent, and overall annual health spending will increase by more than $10 billion over the next four years. And that sets aside to the world's biggest medical research fund. The Leader of the Opposition likes to talk about people's aspirations. We have a collective aspiration for the people of Australia, an aspiration that we as a nation might possess the largest medical research fund in the world—a $20 billion aspiration. Unfortunately, it is only the Australian Labor Party that stand in the way of that happening. So I say to the Australian Labor Party: raise your eyes above the next 24 hours, raise your eyes over the political opportunism, raise your eyes over the knee-jerk reaction and the rank manipulation of Australians' concerns and instead focus on the positives that the coalition are trying to deliver, because that is what Australians expect of us.

When we talk about schools, again we heard the Leader of the Opposition making comments on 20 May. He said, 'He'—that is, the Prime Minister, 'is cutting 80,000 million, $80 billion, from hospitals and schools right across Australia.' He also said, 'These are real cuts to hospitals and schools.' He also said, 'Tony Abbott is taking $80 billion out of hospitals and schools.' Three quotes on the one day—all factually wrong. The fact is that when it comes to Commonwealth funding for our schools it, like health, will continue to increase each and every year.

Students at schools will benefit from the government's record funding investment of $64½ billion over the next four years. What is more, the coalition, when it comes to education, is actually putting an extra $1.2 billion into school funding. I have the privilege of representing a small part, but a great part, of the state of Queensland. That state was left in the lurch by the Australian Labor Party. They did not have the intestinal fortitude to tell Queenslanders that before the election. No, instead they tried to sweep it under the carpet. But we found out in the Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Outlook the real truth, and the real truth was that Queensland and Western Australia were going to see $1.2 billion of funding ripped out of their school system. So don't lecture us about a commitment to the next generation of Australians, because it is only the coalition that has a commitment to making sure that there is more funding on the table when it comes to education.

I also want to address the issue of pensions, because we continue to see the Labor Party out there manipulating and attempting to make sure that they can provide as much misinformation as possible to those among the most vulnerable of our community—Australian pensioners. We saw Bill Shorten on 19 May in Bentleigh East say, 'This is a budget which cuts pensions.' That is his exact quote. Jenny Macklin turned around and said, 'All of these pensions, Tony Abbott wants to cut.' Once again it is plain wrong—completely wrong. The pension, for starters, will not change during this term of parliament. It will keep increasing and the indexation of it will not change in this parliament. In fact, the pension will continue to increase twice a year exactly the same as it always has. In March this year the base rate of the pension increased $14.30 a fortnight for single pensioners and $10.80 a fortnight for each member of a couple. In fact, for each year going forward the pension will continue to increase. That is no cut. I know the Australian Labor Party do not understand how mathematics works and do not really understand finances, either. I have a bit of basic information for the Australian Labor Party: if you have an increase in a payment every single time, that is not a cut; that is an increase. I think it is important that the Australian Labor Party stops trying to mislead.

The most fundamental point is this: I have an amazing privilege of being a father of two young Australians. There are many on both sides of the chamber that have got Aussie kids. We owe a duty of care not only to each of our own children but to all the children of Australia, and all the children of Australia rightly expect of us to bequeath to them an Australia that is better than the Australia that we inherited. That is a pledge that we on this side of the House hold solemn—a pledge that we will uphold. We will only achieve that if we as a nation live within our means. Labor's approach of saying, 'There's no need to change'—that multi-year, multi-tens of billions of dollars deficits are acceptable; that a policy approach that saw us on a pathway to reaching $667 billion worth of debt, that has left Australia in a situation where, thanks to the Labor Party, we have to borrow $1 billion a month just to pay the interest on the debt that Labor accumulated—is unsustainable. It is an approach that will mean Aussie kids will have to spend decades paying back Labor's debt.

When we make the tough but necessary decisions to put Australia back on an even keel, to try to live within our means, to start to make sure that the next generation of Australians actually have the opportunity to not have to pay back the debt from last six years, what does the Labor Party do? They stand in the way. So I say to the Australian Labor Party: it is time to grow up.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to be speaking on this matter of public importance today, namely:

The hurt and division caused by the Government’s unfair budget and broken promises.

That is exactly what it is—an incredibly cruel and unfair budget based on a whole series of broken promises. We all remember all those commitments we heard before the election about no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no new taxes. That is exactly what has happened. They have reneged on all those commitments they made prior to the election. How do Australians feel? They feel completely and totally betrayed by the Liberal and National parties.

Seats like my seat of Richmond in regional Australia have been really hit hard. I know looking across the chamber that there are many members who know that their seats are impacted, particularly those in regional areas. This has been such an unfair and incredibly, incredibly cruel budget. I have been inundated by appeals, particularly from many older Australians, who quite frankly are devastated and in total fear about the implications, particularly in relation to the health measures. In fact, they have are so much in fear that we are having a rally very soon called 'Fighting for a Fair Go' on Thursday, 12 June. Indeed, there will be many people coming from Moncrieff, from the previous speaker's electorate, coming over the border to express their concerns. Those concerns are wide-ranging and I will run through some of those.

First of all we are seeing this government dismantling Medicare, pulling apart those very important parts of universal health care with their $7 GP tax. People are very concerned, particularly older people who have complex medical and health problems. We have also seen it with their $80 billion cuts in funding to schools and hospitals. Again, this will impact regional Australia so severely. When we look at seniors, first of all they will be hit with that GP tax. We have the Prime Minister saying today that it is a 'modest' amount. How appalling and arrogant is it that that he speaks like that of the GP tax? People are terrified of this. People are cancelling their appointments to doctors now because they are so concerned about the impact of this tax. Seniors will also have their pensions cut. They will have them cut with the changing indexation rates. They are also worried about the petrol tax. In regional areas the petrol tax will really hurt. We have also seen cuts to seniors' concessions. For seniors who get rate rebates that makes a very big difference. I know, for example, in the Tweed shire their rate rebate is over $400 per year. That is at stake. So add that to the GP tax and the petrol tax and we see seniors very worried.

Families are concerned as well because of the freeze on the rates of family tax benefits. Families are also impacted by the cuts to funding for hospitals and the $30 billion for schools. What sort of values do the people who make these sorts of funding cuts have? For those in regional areas it is a real betrayal by the Nationals. We see that so many times but this is a complete betrayal by them.

I also want to touch on the impacts on young people. Young people in the regions will be severely impacted—not just through the cuts to schools but also through the cuts to training. There have been billions of dollars taken out of youth training and apprenticeships. For kids in the country who aspire to go to university the government have taken that opportunity away. The Liberal Party and the Nationals have taken that away from regional Australia. The changes to university fees will make it almost impossible for those kids to get to university and to afford it.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is what they are telling me. The families are saying that their children will not be able to access university so I hope those on the other side of the chamber are happy with that. That is what they have done to them. They have taken away their hopes of getting a university education because the fees have been restructured.

There are so many families from my electorate that are very concerned. There are broad based cuts as well. Let's have a look at some of the cuts to councils and their financial assistance grants. In terms of those financial assistance grants over $20 million has been cut from councils from Bellingen to the New South Wales-Queensland border. So they will not be able to move forward on many of the projects they wanted to have.

If you look at regional areas right across the country you will see that this is a cruel, nasty and unfair budget. It is unfair on seniors, families and young people. It is based on the broken promises by each of those members on the other side of the chamber. I say to all those Nationals members from regional areas: shame on you for betraying regional Australia. You walked around telling people that you would not do this, and each of you did it.

Those on the on the other side of the chamber cut education, cut health and cut youth funding. Shame on all of them! These people are hurting and they are terrified. It is unfair and cruel, what you have done.

Mr Pasin interjecting—

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Barker will withdraw that comment.

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What those on the on the other side of the chamber have done is cruel and unfair. The Prime Minister was standing up here today and saying things like, 'It is a modest cut.' That shows that he does not understand because he is out of touch. Each of those members on the on the other side of the chamber is out of touch with the concerns people have right throughout Australia. People know how severe the impacts of these cuts will be.

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today I rise to speak on this matter of public importance put by the opposition entitled 'the hurt and division caused by the government's unfair budget and broken promises'. I have listened to the Leader of the Opposition today and I have listened to the members opposite talk about their view of the budget but I have not heard a single word about their plan to address the mess that they created. Let's not mistake the process here. It was Labor who created the economic mess that we sit in, at the moment—this cesspool of mess created by the Labor Party dumping on Australia.

The Labor Party has no plan to fix it. I say this: all of the wishful thinking in the world will not address the budget situation we have. If members of the Labor Party want to talk about hurt for future Australian generations, what about the debt levels that have been put on each and every Australian? If we had not taken these measures the debt level for every Australian would be just shy of $25,000. So I hear members opposite spruik on about how proud they are of their budget but the debt that they leave for each and every Australian is disgusting.

The Leader of the Opposition was born in 1967. But I think he was brought up to a song by Dusty Springfield, which was written in 1964 by Burt Bacharach, Wishin' and Hopin'. He must have been thinking about that song when he put out his brochure just before the election. It said, 'We have returned to surplus.' He was a-wishin', a-hopin', a-thinkin' and a-prayin', but he has been absolutely caught out because those on the other side of the chamber have no plan. The rhetoric of the Leader of the Opposition during the budget reply showed he had no plan at all. He has no means of reducing the debt that the opposition had created. The debt, through to the forward estimates of MYEFO, was $177 billion. But there is no plan at all.

Nobody likes implementing budget measures which do not hand out sweeteners, gifts or tax cuts, but we are not able to hand those things out because of the mess we have been left. I heard members opposite spruik on about the global financial crisis. The global financial crisis did not last for six years. And the Howard government took surplus after surplus after surplus. The Howard government took us through 9-11, through SARS, through the Asian meltdown and through the US recession, and still delivered a surplus and growth for this country.

It delivered tax cuts to Australians. The Howard government was able to deliver cheques to each and every senior Australian without going into deficit. This mob—those on the on the other side of the chamber—inherited a budget with a $20 billion surplus. They inherited an economic position of $50 billion in the bank. That did not last long. As with a kid in a candy shop on a Saturday; it all went in the first five minutes. Those on the other side of the chamber promised surpluses but delivered the highest deficits this country has ever seen, and they are proud of it. They are proud of the deficit and the burden they have placed on each and every Australian, and generations to come.

Even though we have taken these measures at this stage we have only been able to reduce the debt level to $389 billion. More work needs to be done. We need to grow our economy. We need to make sure we get more Australians into work so we can address this situation, because if we do not it will not just be up to my children. I do not have any grandchildren yet but one day I might. And it might be their children and their children and their children who will still be paying off the excess largesse of the former, Labor government.

I have not heard one word of apology to the Australian people by this Labor government for the mess that they have created. I want the members opposite to think about one thing: what you could buy with the $12 billion per annum in interest bills. If we were not borrowing to pay off the interest bill what would $12 billion buy? You could do the school funding—Gonski—two times over. You could do Gonski this year and the NDIS this year and still have change left over from the $12 billion.

The Labor opposition, when they were in government, hocked our future. They stopped the ability to invest in the future for each and every Australian, because they do not know the difference between debt and surplus. They do not understand that a deficit is a negative. That was proven by the Leader of the Opposition in the newsletter that he put out for the public saying, 'We have returned to surplus.' Not once did they return to surplus.

Andrew Nikolic (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise on a point of order. The member for Griffith is constantly interjecting out of her place.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I did not hear her over the level of noise coming from some of your close neighbours.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

People in my electorate of Chisholm are angry. People across Australia are angry. Many of them voted for a government—and, indeed, individuals opposite—that, they were promised, would deliver a budget of 'no surprises, no excuses.' What did we get on budget night? Surprise after surprise and, indeed, shock after shock. I could everyone opposite, who were out chanting time and time again: no cuts to education, no cuts to health, no change to pensions, no change to the GST and no cuts to the ABC or SBS. What did we see on budget night? We saw cuts to all of these things and more. We had surprise after surprise, shock after shock, and people are angry. People are palpably angry—and not about their own hip pockets but about how it is affecting everybody else. I have quotes from my constituents, and all of them are quite remarkable. It is not like in the Howard days when it was all about 'What's in it for me?' These are real concerns about how this budget is going to affect people who are less well off than others. John from Mount Waverley said:

I would like to let you know that many voters like myself who are relatively well off are dismayed and disgusted by the way we and those wealthier than us have been protected by this present government at the expense of the poor and less fortunate.

Andrew from Mont Albert North said:

After voting Liberal in all but one federal election over the last 30 years, I intend voting Labor at the next election. While I'm not against budget tightening, I don't want Australia to become like America and I believe the Liberals have seriously misjudged many of their own traditional voters by the ideology apparent in the latest budget.

Peter from Burwood East said:

I am a 61 year old accountant and I don't mind paying my share but have seldom been so incensed by a conceited and arrogant government and its war on the vulnerable in our society.

Curt from Box Hill North said:

I am so absolutely furious with disgust about the deceitful way Australians are being treated as is evidenced by the budget presented last week by the Abbott/Hockey circus.

Brendan from Mount Waverley said:

I have a 9-year-old daughter and am terrified about losing my job. I have a $250,000 mortgage and educational expenses to meet. Abbott has killed my future and my family's future—what do I do?

Finally, Diana from Surrey Hills said:

This budget is full of slogans and mantras totally out of touch with the real experience of real people.

Those are just a few of the messages I have received in my electorate, and I would be astounded if anyone opposite is going to be honest about the messages they are receiving in their electorate offices. Again, these people are not talking about what the budget is doing to them but to those less fortunate, and they are asking how we are going to share this pain. We are not sharing this pain; that is the problem. It is the people who are less able to afford these cuts who are going to be hurt the most. It is particularly harsh on anybody who lives on a fixed income, like the many, many thousands of self-funded retirees and full pensioners who live in my electorate.

In my electorate, 79 per cent of all GP visits are bulk-billed. It is not the largest bulk-billing rate in the country but, with the $7 tax added to every visit to the doctor, it will cost the people of Chisholm at least an extra $5.5 million in the first year alone of this cruel tax. That figure is just for the visits to doctors; it does not count the extra millions that families and retirees in my community will have to fork out for pathology services, mammograms and the many other medical services for which they would make a bulk-billed payment; now they will have to make a co-payment.

The Australian Medical Association, the Australian College of Emergency Medicine, the Doctors Reform Society, the Public Health Association, the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners, the Consumer Health Forum, the Australian Healthcare and Hospitals Association—not many great Labor supporters amongst them—and countless other health academics and economists have advised against this tax, but the government is doing it anyway. How can the family of an ill person feel confident that they can get access to the health care they need? This government's $50 billion cuts to hospital funding will also put pressure back on the hospital system—and that will be a double pressure, because you will not go to the GP but to the emergency ward. That is what is going to happen.

To add to their pain, when sick people need to get their medication they will have to pay an extra $5 for every prescription they need. We all know people who have multiple prescriptions. My mother is an absolute walking pillbox. This is going to cost her a fortune. What part of their fixed budget should they cut? What part of their fixed budget will they cut into? They will lose out. This is an atrocious budget and this government should be condemned.

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Australian economy has suffered from six years of failed Labor fiscal policy, and we need strong leadership to repair the damage done by Labor in government. We hear the rank hypocrisy of Labor members opposite, who complain about this government taking the necessary actions that they were too weak and too incompetent to take. We saw not only the debt and deficit mess but also the chaos of two prime ministers—the tag team prime ministership—three deputy prime ministers, five ministers for regional development, six ministers for small business and nine ministers for education. They were an embarrassment in office but at least they are consistent, because they are still an embarrassment in opposition.

Let us take a look at the legacy of those years of Labor economic failure. We saw five years of cumulative Labor deficits of $191 billion—and uncontrolled spending that has seen gross debt blow out to $360 billion and net debt passing $200 billion. This debt, left to the government by Labor, is costing us $12 billion in interest each and every year. That is $1 billion a month in interest, or $33 million a day, or $1.4 million an hour. This year's $12 billion debt interest bill is equivalent to around half of Australia's defence budget. It really makes you wonder where the nation was heading under Labor.

Had Australia been forced to endure another Labor government after the September election, we were heading for even bigger deficits—a projected $123 billion in the next four years—and big increases in debt, to $667 billion of gross debt. And that is without the further spending that Labor announced and would have engaged in. A prime example of Labor creating a financial mess and then pretending to be ostriches hiding their heads in the sand was the former member for Lilley's response when asked about Labor's obscene debt trajectory. His response—it's a classic: 'That will be someone else's problem.' And don't we hear a continuation of it. What a Labor legend—create a financial mess and then hide your head in the sand!

The debt we have to pay and the interest is due to additional borrowings. It is a prime example, as we know, of paying off your mortgage with your credit card. If debts were allowed to spiral out of control to the levels predicted under more Labor governments, it would take generation after generation to pay back, leaving our children and grandchildren to pay back the current Labor legacy. What we have heard today is typical of them hiding their head in the sand. The West Australian editorial today says: 'We can't wish away a looming budget crisis.' But that is what those on the opposite side would have us do. The article went on to say:

The solution must involve reining in spending and putting in place structures that can ensure the sustainability of the Budget. The problem can't be wished away. There needs to be policy changes and there needs to be hard decisions.

We in this place know that that is something that Labor is incapable of—hard decisions.

There has been discussion about the debt left by the Keating government in 1996, which the Howard government had to repay. That $97 billion debt was looking like being an intergenerational transfer of debt to our children. We had to fix it then, and here we are, after just six years of a Labor government, having to do it all again. But the Australian people know that we are up for the job, because we have done it before. We have done it before and we will do it again. That is one thing that the Australian people can be confident of. We are capable of tough decisions and we will make the tough decisions. We are certainly capable of making the tough decisions to fix the mess that Labor has left us with.

The National Commission of Audit identified that, if left unchecked, government expenditure would explode from $409 billion this year to $700 billion within a decade. The figures are quite frightening. If anybody here inherited a private business with this set of books, what on earth would you do? You would have no choice but to take action—and the coalition is doing just that in government. We are reducing the deficits projected through to 2017-18 by $43.8 billion—something those opposite are definitely not capable of doing. We are reducing gross debt from the predicted Labor outcome of $667 billion by nearly $300 billion. We refuse to simply pass the debt burden onto the next generation, as Labor is so willing to do.

Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Forrest talked a few times about hard decisions, tough decisions, and the willingness of this government to make them. I think, in essence, that is what is so sad about this budget and this government. They are so eager to impose pain on those least able to bear it; so keen to ensure that those least able to pay are asked to contribute the most. Through this debate today, in a parliament which seems determined to debate everything apart from the budget priority of this government, we have seen plenty of bluster from those opposite, those speaking and those interjecting, but no amount of desperation can cover up a very uncomfortable truth for members of the Liberal Party and the National Party: that this budget rests on a mountain of deceit—as everyone in your electorates knows—and will cause untold pain in this community.

When conservatives, like the Treasurer, talk of lifters and leaners, they are deliberately dividing Australians and turning our community on itself. I think we all understand that the lifters and leaners are the haves and have-nots. In recent weeks we have had a big debate about inequality in the developed world, in particular rising inequality in countries like Australia. In most of the developed world this is a matter for concern but, through the Commission of Audit and then the budget that followed very faithfully the Business Council of Australia's script, we have seen almost a how-to guide to boost inequality and to return us to a gilded age where the circumstances of your birth determine your life choices. That might be this government's vision for Australia, but it is not the Labor Party's nor is it the Australian people's.

This talk of shared burden is, in these terms, so very offensive. It is also untrue. Those with the least are being asked to do the most. The cruellest cuts of all actually do not affect Australians. I am talking about the $7.6 billion cut from overseas development aid in this budget—cut from people who do not have any say in these decisions.

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Andrew Giles (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The contempt we hear through these interjections shows the contempt members opposite have for the most vulnerable people—not just in our communities but in the world.

There is no doubt that this is a matter of the greatest public importance. It goes to the heart of what is wrong with this government and what is undermining our democracy. This is at two levels—both of which are very important. It is about integrity—a matter the Prime Minister was very keen on until about 6 September last year—and it is also about substance. It is about choices; it is about priorities—not matters members opposite have gone into today. They are more interested in stunts.

This was to be a 'no surprises, no excuses' government. Of the many quotes the Prime Minister offered up before the election, this one is my favourite. On Melbourne radio the day before the election the then opposition leader and now Prime Minister said:

The fact is the most important thing I can do for our country in the coming months is to ensure that it is possible once more to have faith in your polity, to have faith in your government and that means keeping commitments.

I could not agree more with our Prime Minister on that. It is a pity that he does not agree with the words he spoke before the election. This was of course the day of 'No cuts to education, no cuts to health, no changes to pensions, no change to the GST and no cuts to the ABC or SBS'. These clear promises are all broken or in the process of being broken through the backdoor, as with the GST increase. It is breaking the modern Australian settlement of universal health care and access to higher education based on merit—the very social fabric of a merit based society premised on principles of equity and equality.

But what this budget really comes down to is not the long, sad list of broken promises and their impacts—because the sum of these broken promises is, sadly, greater than the individual parts. I turn to the words of the member for Higgins—and it is a pity she is not here. I am going to turn to her words in the Financial Review yesterday but turn them around so that they reflect our reality, not her warped ideological view. This is a budget that entrenches and embodies selfishness. For our children's sake, we must reverse this trend. We must bring Australians together in common purpose and work every day in our communities to undermine this divisive budget and the hurt that it has already caused. It must stop now.

Wyatt Roy (Longman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I stand here in the federal parliament with my parliamentary colleagues, I think it is important that we reflect on why we are actually here. What is the responsibility that comes with being an elected member? Surely our greatest responsibility is to ensure that the Australia that we hand over to the next generation has as much if not more opportunity than the one we inherited. Surely our greatest responsibility is to say to those Australians, 'We are prepared to meet the difficult challenges that our country faces so that you can inherit a country where you have the same opportunity to get ahead, where you don't have to pay more tax than we did, where the government of your day has the same opportunities to invest in roads, infrastructure and education.' That is what this debate around the budget is all about. It is a moral question about what we leave behind as much as it is an economic argument, and it is really important that we put on the table the reality of what we actually face, because so much of this debate has centred on an idea that we will simply say that a problem does not exist when it clearly does.

So let me run through what the problem is. Under the former government spending increased faster than it did in any of the 17 advanced IMF economies. That was borrowed money against the next generation. If we do nothing debt will reach $667 billion. That is a big figure. If we put it into context it is over $24,000 for every single Australian. The next generation, if we do nothing, will start off their working life with a bill of $24,000 for every single man, woman and child. That is, in this year, $500 for each and every single one of us to repay the interest on the debt. If we do nothing, that hits $17 billion a year. That is over $1,200 a year per person to repay the interest on the debt.

Let me put that into perspective. For this year alone $12 billion would fund the complete upgrade of the Bruce Highway for over $8 billion, it would fund the upgrade of the Gateway Motorway for $1.2 billion and it would build a new tertiary hospital for Queensland for $2 billion, and we would still have hundreds of millions of dollars left over. Instead the former government thought it was a good idea to hand out $900 cheques to people living overseas and to dead people, and to have pink batts and school halls. That was money that was borrowed against the next generation of Australians.

Before we deal with that debt problem, we also have a demographic challenge as a nation. We are going to see the percentage of the population aged over 75 go from about six per cent to over 14 per cent. That is a challenge; it is not a problem but it is a challenge we have to be prepared to meet. If we do nothing the Productivity Commission says taxes would have to rise by 21 per cent. So if we do nothing—if we do what the Labor Party is proposing, which is simply to keep borrowing against the next generation—we are going to say that an Australian born today will inherit a debt of $24,000 a person and we think they should also pay 21 per cent higher taxes than we do. I am not prepared to be part of a government that says that is okay.

The reality is that all of us must contribute to pay back the debt that we were left by the former Labor government. All of us have to contribute. And it is not easy. But I am not prepared to engage in a political debate that those members opposite, members of the Labor Party, want to engage in, which is a cheap, opportunistic debate which will deny future generations the same opportunities that we have, the same opportunities to invest in roads and schools and hospitals for future generations. So we have to live within our means and we have to go for growth in the private sector, because it is not the government that creates wealth and prosperity; it is actually those hardworking Australians out there in the community.

That is why we are going to cut the carbon tax—so that we can help not only families and locals in my community to get ahead but businesses to go out there and thrive and prosper and employ more people. It is why we are cutting a billion dollars worth of red tape every single year—so that businesses in my community can grow and prosper and thrive and employ more people. It is why we are creating, for the first time ever, opportunities for young people to take up a trade, a diploma or higher education without paying a dollar—so that as people go into the workforce they can pay tax and continue to deliver greater prosperity for our nation into the future.

Chris Hayes (Fowler, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Like many on this side, I imagine that over the past week some on the other side would have been out and about in their constituencies, talking to families and looking people in the eye, and they would have probably discovered what we did: mums and dads out there are certainly not happy with this budget; pensioners think it is diabolical; road users think they are being used and abused; and the group which surprised me a little bit when I met them was the doctors—they thought all their doctors clinics had been turned into tax collection agencies.

In looking at this budget, where have they targeted? They have targeted pensioners, they have targeted families, they have targeted young people and they have certainly targeted job seekers. This government has confected a budget emergency—and I heard the diatribe from the member for Longman, who spoke prior to me—but the fact is that Australia's debt ratio is 12.1 per cent of GDP. When you look at the OECD countries that we compete with, you see that their average debt ratio is 75 per cent of GDP. So the government should not run around talking about this confected emergency.

No wonder those opposite were complaining when jobs were being created in every school that had new science blocks or new school halls built. They might want to whinge and bleat about it now, but you would remember, Mr Deputy Speaker Mitchell, what they were like in those days. They used to run along and jump up like Where's Wally to get their photo in the local newspapers. They would not miss out on that. They got caught out time and time again saying how wonderful it was that there was this investment in education, as if they had something to do with it!

Bear in mind what happened when the global financial crisis hit, when they were sitting on this side of the House. Their shadow Treasurer's view was, 'We should wait and see how bad this gets.' They were not taking advice from Treasury. They were not taking any advice from economists. Their plan was to wait and see how bad it got. But they come in here and expect to be treated as economic geniuses!

All they have been doing is hoodwinking people about what is in this budget. But we on this side know—and I am sure they do too, because they did not like their seats being mentioned, I noticed, this week—what pensioners think about this. We know what pensioners think about having to make a $7 co-payment every time they go to their doctor. Maybe those opposite do not know; I accept that. My mum lives with me. She is 85. I know how often she has to go to the doctor because I take her. I know how much medication she needs because I go and get it for her. Now, if those fellows opposite think that people on age pensions go to the doctor with the same frequency as a younger, fit person, they have rocks in their heads. They have shown they do not understand.

By the way, that point was made to me loud and clear last week, when I attended the national seniors forum. You probably won a few votes off them last election. But now that they will be paying another $7 every time they visit a doctor and paying another $5 for every medication they get, they think that they have been used and abused. Now it has come out that the age pension age will increase by six months every two years. Those opposite said it today. What they are not saying is that they have adjusted the indexation rate. If the indexation rate that they have introduced now, which is indexed to the CPI, was applied five years ago, our age pensioners would be $1,600 a year worse off. The only reason you have changed it from indexation to average weekly male earnings to indexation to CPI is you know you are going to rip off pensioners. This is designed to make a cut. As a matter of fact, looking at the budget, you are seeking a $400 million benefit out of that.

When it comes to looking after people—when it comes to looking after the aged, people seeking employment, young people who want to go to university—there is only one side of this parliament that stands up for those people. Those opposite might be jumping up and down now, but they were not doing it last week in their electorates, were they? They were not out putting advertising in their newspapers. They did not go out there and justify what they did in this budget. Why? Because they were so embarrassed. They did not know, in their own party room, what was about to happen. They kept their heads down. They should keep them down because they should hang them in shame. It is shameful what they have done.

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In speaking on this matter of public importance, I say to the member for Fowler, quickly, before he leaves the chamber, that last week I was out in my electorate every day talking to people, doing a mobile office. I was out every night of the week explaining our position and what this budget is all about. The opposition say that this budget is about hurt and division. They say it is an unfair budget. I am here to say that that is not true. This budget is about a number of things. Most importantly, it is about repaying and tackling Australia's debt and deficit problem; it is about ensuring that our welfare system is sustainable long into the future; and it is about building and investing in record infrastructure in this country.

Looking at the debt and deficit issue, we know that, over the last six years of Labor government, all the tax they collected from people throughout this country—all the income tax that they received from everyone working, here in this place and throughout the country, all the company tax that they received from all over the country—was all spent by Labor, plus another $200 billion. There was $191 billion in deficits for the last six years and they left us another $123 billion in the forward estimates. My father always said to me, 'Son, if you're going to get a loan, if you're going to borrow money, then you need to ensure that you budget for a 10 per cent interest rate.'

Now, $191 billion means $19 billion a year in interest. Thankfully, we have a better interest rate than that and we are only paying $1 billion a month. We are only paying $12 billion a year. To put that amount into perspective—one of the members today spoke about the ABC—the entire ABC runs on a budget of $1 billion a year. What we are paying in interest alone is enough to fund 12 ABCs. Imagine what we could do with that money if we had not been left with Labor's legacy of debt and deficit. Neither the Leader of the Opposition nor the members for Fowler, Scullin, Chisholm and Richmond mentioned in this debate a single dollar they would save when they bring down their budget, should they get back into power.

This budget is about ensuring that our welfare system is sustainable. The opposition leader said today that there was no support for people under 30 in this budget—no support. I say: stop scaring people. There are lots of safety nets in our budget. We live in Australia, the greatest country on earth. For those people who are doing it tough, who are on disability, who are unemployed, who have a mental illness, of course there are safety nets. For single mums, of course there is a safety net; there are welfare payments. But the days of leaving year 12 and going on the dole a month later are gone.

This budget is about infrastructure. We are building in my electorate. We are upgrading the Bruce Highway at every intersection, I think, between Bald Hills and Caloundra, right up to the member for Fisher's seat. We are upgrading the Gateway Motorway. We are investing in infrastructure to get people moving and to get small business moving, because on this side of the House we believe in lower taxes and smaller government. We believe that small businesses are the ones that employ people in this country, not government. By investing in infrastructure, those small businesses will be able to get moving.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Who built your rail line?

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Grayndler says, 'Who built the rail line?' I am happy to say that the Moreton Bay Rail Link will be funded. I acknowledge that you guys wanted to build it and it had bipartisan support. But what I would say is that our government, the Abbott government, is funding it. There is $108 million in this year's budget, $200 million in the next.

The members opposite talk about division. Well, it is the members opposite that wanted to divide this country—workers against employers, rich against poor, haves against have-nots—and I say that this is not good enough. We are all people in this nation and we want to see everyone become aspirational. We want everyone to do their best, and this budget is part of that measure to do that—leading to a better future for all Australians.

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time for this matter of public importance and this debate has expired. The discussion is now concluded.